JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP V. MARNE J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, Writ Petitions are taken up for final hearing and disposal.

2. These four Petitions raise the issue of entitlement of Respondent to gratuity for services rendered by him with the Petitioners. There is no dispute to the position that Respondent is entitled to gratuity for services rendered with Petitioners. The dispute is about the exact amount of gratuity payable to him. He has rendered two tranches of service, under Terna Polytechnic and Terna Engineering College. The Controlling and Appellate Authorities under The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Gratuity Act) have directed payment of two separate amounts of gratuity by Terna Polytechnic and Terna Engineering College. The grievance of the Petitioners is with regard to the quantification of gratuity of Respondent by taking into consideration the last pay drawn by him at the time of resignation on 21 July 2011 for determining his entitlement of gratuity in respect of services rendered by him in Terna Polytechnic during 17 September 1992 to 30 June 2004. It is the contention of Petitioners that the last pay draw